HomeMy WebLinkAbout2006-099
1
RESOLUTION NO. 2006-99
2
3 RESOLUTION OF THE CITY OF SAN BERNARDINO APPROVING AN
AGREEMENT FOR SERVICES WITH JACOBSON & WACK FOR THE PROVISION
4 OF PROFESSIONAL PLANNING CONSULTING SERVICES FOR THE
5 DEVELOPMENT CODE UPDATES.
BE IT RESOLVED BY THE MAYOR AND COMMON COUNCIL OF THE CITY
OF SAN BERNARDINO AS FOLLOWS:
6
7
8
9 services based upon previous experience in the City of San Bernardino. Pursuant to this
10
SECTION 1. Jacobson & Wack is competent, experienced, and able to perform said
determination, the Purchasing Manager is hereby authorized and directed to issue a Purchase
11 Order for said services to Jacobson & Wack. The Mayor is hereby authorized and directed to
12 execute an Agreement for Planning Consulting Services; a copy of which is attached hereto and
13
incorporated herein. (Attachment A)
14
15
16 Agreement is rescinded if they are not signed and issued within sixty (60) days of the passage of
17
SECTION 2. The authorization to execute the above referenced Purchase Order and
this resolution.
18 III
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
26
27
28
- I -
1 RESOLUTION OF THE MAYOR AND COMMON COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF SAN
2 BERNARDINO APPROVING AN AGREEMENT FOR SERVICES WITH JACOBSON
& WACK FOR THE PROVISION OF PROFESSIONAL PLANNING CONSULTING
3 SERVICES FOR THE DEVELOPMENT CODE UPDATES.
4
I HEREBY CERTIFY that the foregoing Resolution was duly adopted by the Mayor and
joint
6 Common Council of the City of San Bernardino at a . regular meeting thereof, held on the
, 17th
7 day of April
8
9
5
, 2006, by the following vote, to wit:
Council Members:
AYES
NAYS
ABSTAIN
ABSENT
ESTRADA
--1L
10 BAXTER
11
MC GINNIS
12
DERRY
13
x
x
x
KELLEY
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
x
JOHNSON
x
MC CAMMACK
x
(~
l;J, ~,
City Clerk
'{IX
The foregoing resolution is hereby approved this ~O ./ day of April
,2006.
21
22
23
24
<>-v'<-"--'
c .r Morris. Ma
f San Bernardino
Approved as to
25 fo and legal content:
26 .'~
27
28
es F. Penman,
ity Attorney
III
- 2 -
2006-99
ORIGINAL
ATTACHMENT A
AGREEMENT FOR PLANNING CONSULTING SERVICES
This AGREEMENT is made and entered into this 17 taay of April , 2006, by and
between Jacobson & Wack ("Contractor") and the CITY OF SAN BERNARDINO ("CITY").
WITNESSETH:
A. WHEREAS, CITY has need for planning consulting services within the City
and,
B. WHEREAS, CONTRACTOR is competent and able to perform said services,
and,
NOW, THEREFORE, the parties hereto agree as follows:
I. CONTRACTOR shall provide planning consulting services to CITY
related to updates/revisions to the City's Development Code in accordance
with "Proposal to Comprehensively Update the City's Development
Code," dated February 27,2006, attached and incorporated herein as
Attachment 1.
2. Over the term of this Agreement, CONTRACTOR shall be paid for such
services an amount not to exceed $75,000, in accordance with Attachment
1.
3. CONTRACTOR shall provide the Director of Development Services
with a monthly statement of hours worked in arrears and shall be provided
payment within thirty (30) days therefrom. CITY retains the right to
challenge all or any part of the statement.
4. The term of this Agreement shall be from April 17, 2006 until
April!7, 2007 or until completion of the project, whichever comes first.
This Agreement may be terminated by two weeks written notice for any
reason, by either party.
5. CONTRACTOR shall indemnify, defend and hold CITY, its officers,
employees and agents harmless from any claim, demand, liability, suit,
judgement or expense (including, without limitation, reasonable costs of
defense) arising out of or related to CONTRACTOR'S performance
under this Agreement, except that such duty to indemnify, defend and hold
harmless shall not apply where injury to person or property is caused by
CITY'S willful or sole negligence.
2006-99
Jacobson & Wack
Agreement For Services
Attaclunent A Page 2 of 4
6.
CONTRACTOR shall perform work tasks as directed by the Director of
Development Services or his designee, but for all intents and purposes
CONTRACTOR shall be an independent contractor and not an agent or
employee of the CITY and, as such, shall not be entitled to any benefits,
including but not limited to, medical insurance, retirement and workers'
compensation.
7.
CONTRACTOR understands and agrees that as the City's planning
consultant, CONTRACTOR shall maintain a fiduciary duty and a duty of
loyalty to the City in performing CONTRACTOR'S obligations under
this Agreement. CONTRACTOR shall not meet, discuss, or otherwise
communicate with any property owner, developer, architect, agency, etc.
with regard to CONTRACTOR'S performance as described in
Attachment I.
8.
In the performance of this Agreement CONTRACTOR shall not
discriminate on the basis of race, creed, color, religion, sex, physical
handicap, ethnic background or country of origin.
9.
CONTRACTOR commits the principal personnel listed below to the
project for its duration:
Bruce Jacobson
Paul Wack
10. The CITY has determined that the individuals named in this Agreement
are necessary for the successful performance of this Agreement. No
diversion or replacement of these individuals shall be made by
CONTRACTOR without written consent of the Department. If the
Department fails to respond to CONTRACTOR within ten (10) working
days of notification by CONTRACTOR, said personnel diversion or
replacement shall be deemed approved.
11. Any notice to be given pursuant to this Agreement shall be deposited with
the United States Postal Service, postage prepaid and addressed as
follows:
To the City: James Funk
Director of Development Services
300 North "D" Street
San Bernardino, CA 92418
To the Contractor: Bruce Jacobson
Land Use Planuing Consultants
9350 Hageman Road, Suite "B" 205
Bakersfield, CA 93312
2006-99
Jacobson & Wack
Agreement For Services
Attachment A Page 3 of 4
Nothing in this paragraph shall be construed to prevent the giving of
notices by personal service.
12. CONTRACTOR shall maintain insurance policies meeting the minimum
requirements set forth herein. All insurance maintained by the
CONTRACTOR shall be provided by insurers satisfactory to the City.
Certificates evidencing all insurance coverage required herein shall be
delivered to the City prior to the CONTRACTOR performing any of the
services under this Agreement. All insurance certificates required herein
shall name the City as an additional insured and provide for thirty (30)
days written notice from the insurer to the City prior to cancellation or
amendment of any insurance policy of the CONTRACTOR.
A. Comprehensive General Liabilitv and Automobile Insurance - The
CONTRACTOR shall maintain comprehensive general liability
and automobile liability insurance with a combined single limit of
not less than One Million Dollars ($1,000,000.00) per occurrence.
B. Worker's Compensation Insurance - The CONTRACTOR shall
maintain worker's compensation insurance in accordance with the
laws of the State of California for all workers employed by the
CONTRACTOR.
13. CONTRACTOR shall obtain and maintain a valid City Business
Registration Certificate during the term of this Agreement.
III
III
III
III
2006-99
Jacobson & Wack
Agreement For Services
Attachment A Page 4 of 4
IN WITNESS WHEREOF, the parties hereto have executed this
agreement on the day and date first above shown.
Date:
By:
CITY OF SAN BERNARDINO
By:
~~
Approved as to form
And legal content:
James F. Penman,
City Attorney
ATTACHMENTil
2006-99
Jacobson & Wack
Land Use Planning Consultants
9530 Hageman Road, Suite "B" 205, Bakersfield, CA 93312, (661) 213-4100 (661) 213-4100 (FAX)
jwplans@lightspeed.net
February 27, 2006
Ms. Valerie Ross, Deputy Director/City Planner
City of San Bernardino Development Services Department, Planning Division
300 North "D" Street
San Bernardino, CA 92418
Subject: Proposal to Comprehensively Update the City's Development Code
Dear Ms. Ross:
The firm of Jacobson & Wack is pleased to submit this proposal for the preparation of the City of San
Bernardino's comprehensive Development Code update.
We are particularly excited about the project outlined within the Request for Proposal because it provides
us the opportunity to work with your City once again after the successful completion of the 1991
Development Code. We especially appreciate the opportunity to work with repeat clients, as exemplified
by not only your City, but the cities of Fillmore and Rancho Mirage as well.
It is very clearly understood by our firm that while the City has identified this program as a
comprehensive update to the 1991 Development Code, a major overhaul to the current Code is not desired
nor is being proposed. Our firm further understands that the format, layout, and overall organization of
the current Development Code works well for the City and that a good number of architects, contractors,
developers, and engineers are familiar with the layout of the Development Code and would not want to
experience any unnecessary format-related changes. We want to assure the City that we have undertaken
this type of assignment in the past, with extremely successful conclusions. We know what you want and
have the experience and ability to accomplish your vision for this project.
Beyond the wide range of experience that we have earned through the completion of similar projects, we
believe that one of the most important benefits we offer the City is our "hands-on" approach to the
services we provide. Paul Wack and I will be directly and continually involved in all work efforts for the
City, as we gain particular satisfaction from working closely with our municipal clients, as we did with
you fifteen years ago. The fact that past clients have retained us for additional work demonstrates our
ability to deliver timely services of high quality, at reasonable costs.
In closing, our firm shares the City's vision of a final product that maintains the high quality of your
current Development Code, that is written in a clear, concise, and internally consistent manner, that is
user friendly and easy to understand, and contains helpful and pleasing charts, graphics, illustrations, and
tables.
We look forward to discussing our proposal and qualifications further with you, and are excited about the
opportunity to work with the City once again. If you have any questions or require further information,
please contact me at (661) 213-4100.
Respectfully Submitted,
Bruce Jacobson, Principal
Jacobson & Wack
2006-99
Proposal for Professional Services
City of San Bernardino
DEVELOPMENT CODE
COMPREHENSIVE UPDATE
February 27, 2006
Jacobson & Wack
Land Use Planning Consultants
2006-99
Proposal for the City of San Bernardino Development Code Update
Proposal for
DEVELOPMENT CODE UPDATE
CITY OF SAN BERNARDINO
Table of Contents
A. Proposed Approach ......................................................................................................................... 2
I. Overall Understandings/Objectives............... ................ .... ...... ............ ... ....... ....... ...... ..... ...... 2
2. Wark Program ... ... ....... ......... ............ ........ ......... .......... ... ....... ........ ... ....... ....... .......... ... ..... ..... 3
B. Proposed Project Schedule............................................................................................................11
C. Proposed Project Budget...............................................................................................................12
D. Optional Services ........................................................................................................................... 14
I. Community Outreach Program....................................................................................14
2. Additional Items in Need of Update............................................................ ................ 15
3. Electronic Ordinance............................................... .................. ............................ ...... 15
4. Development Code Maintenance................................................................................. 16
E. Utilization of Graphics ..................................................................................................................18
F. City Staff Commitments ................................................................................................................18
G. The Firm......................................................................................................................................... 20
I. Identification of Firm. ............ ......... ............ ......... ... ....... ... ........ .................. .......... ...... ..... .... 20
2. Firm Member Profiles .........................................................................................................20
H. Responsibilities and Experience ................................................................................................... 22
I. Responsibilities...... .......... ......... ......... ... ..... .... ...... ... ... ....... ... .... ....... .... ... .............. ... ...... ....... 22
2. Relevant Development Code/Zoning Ordinance Preparation Experience........................... 22n
3. Advantages of Firm .. .................. ......... ............ .......... ...... ........... .................. ....................... 23
t. References ........................................................................................................................................ 25
Appendix A - Approach to Zoning Documents .................................................................................28
Page 1
2006-99
Proposal for the City of San Bernardino Development Code Update
A. Proposed Approach
1. Overall Understanding/Objectives
We understand that the project, as described in the City's RFP, would result in the preparation of an
updated Development Code to: (I) ensure implementation of the goals, objectives, and policies of the
updated General Plan, and as reflected in Appendix I(Implementation Measures); (2) ensure
compliance with all pertinent State and Federal laws; (3) introduction of additional performance
standards to encourage good design with an appropriate degree of flexibility; and (4) make the
Development Code legally adequate, readable, clear in intent, internally consistent, user-friendly, and
graphically pleasing.
The updated Development Code would effectively incorporate the zoning designations identified
within the combined General Plan/Zoning Map, to include residential, commercial, industrial, open
space, public buildings and facilities, recreation, and other categories of public and private land uses,
as well as the appropriate development standards. Outdated development standards would be
replaced/modified with more contemporary, quality standards which recognize the potential to
enhance the already viable areas of the City, while maintaining the community's character and
obvious commitment to the natural features that cater to local residents and tourists alike. Existing
written and unwritten policies would also be codified into the appropriate Development Code sections.
The document would be reformatted and rewritten, as needed, to provide clear and concise language.
It would also incorporate appropriate cross referencing, updated definitions, tables, illustrations, and
graphics to ensure that the completed Development Code would be internally consistent and easy to
use by public officials, City staff, the development community, and the general public, especially
those unfamiliar with San Bernardino zoning requirements.
We appreciate the City's desire for a comprehensive update of the Development Code without
compromising the organizational integrity of the existing document. We recall the challenge 15 years
ago when the Development Code was first created, which represented a significant change to the
City's traditional zoning and subdivision regulatory system. Several of the current planning staff
members were even apprehensive of implementing a completely new system. It is our understanding
that the Development Code and the related administrative support system has evolved to become
fundamentally sound and has been accepted by the development community and City staff. It does not
require a major overhaul, although some reform is necessary.
We sincerely believe that comprehensively updating the content of Development Code need not be
disruptive to the existing layout/format. Review of the new General Plan reinforces this observation.
For example, the Zoning Consistency Matrix (Appendix 8) suggests that the existing Article II format
of the Development Code is adequate and can be easily amended to consolidate land use/zoning
districts, incorporate new provisions, and revise outdating ones. Of course, review of the Land Use
Element, among other components of the General Plan, may encourage refreshing the purpose
statements of the various zoning districts to better reflect contemporary conditions and community
needs. Appendix I (Implementation Measures) provides guidance that reaffirms no need for major
reorganization of the Development Code format (A-I). For example, the "Housing Element,
Quantified Objectives" highlights Provision for Mobile Homes (6), Density Bonus (9), Single Family
Development Design Review (20), and Elimination of Governmental Constraints (41) which are
objectives that can be easily accommodated within the existing framework of the Development Code.
Page 2
2006-99
Proposal for the City of San Bernardino Development Code Update
In the case of item 41, amending the Development Code to "allow more administrative decisions by
staff or Zoning Administrator to grant discretionary approvals to housing projects", can effectively be
implemented by amending the existing Review Authority table and related text. In the case of
definitions, we noticed that about 80 terms in the General Plan Glossary (Appendix 6) will require
review for consistency with the existing definitions in the Development Code.
Given our previous participation in the creation, adoption, and subsequent major revision of the
Development Code in the late 1990s, we are confident that comprehensive updating without major
overhaul is easily achievable and the best approach for this project.
We are certainly interested, willing, and available to complete the work program identified in this
proposal.
For a more detailed description of our firm's approach to the preparation of zoning documents, please
refer to Appendix A, Approach to Zoning Documents.
2. Work Program
The following recommended work program for the San Bemardino Development Code update is
based on our current understanding of the City's needs and our experience with other similar projects
(Clovis, Hollister, Lodi, Murrieta, Rancho Mirage, Simi Valley, Stockton, etc.). We are prepared to
revise the scope of work as necessary to satisfy the City's goals for the project and any financing
limitations. The proposed project schedule on page II identifies the timing of each task.
Task 1 - Needs Identification and Document Review
The consultants must have a detailed understanding of the City's expectations/objectives for the
Development Code update before beginning preparation of the document. This task would include
discussions with City staff, as well as other research necessary to refine the content and format of the
updated Development Code.
Subtasks:
1.1 Startup meeting. The consultants would meet with Community Development staff to refine the
scope/schedule, review the objectives for the updated Development Code, and inventory
problems/issues associated with the present Development Code (including regulatory topics that
need attention but are not fully addressed in current City ordinances).
This sub task is anticipated to include a day of meetings, first with the City's staff team, including
staff members involved with the review and processing of land use permits; site plan/design
review; public counter work and answering citizen questions about land use and development
regulations; and Development Code enforcement. The consultants would also meet with
selected staff from other departments as determined to be necessary by the City's project
manager.
1.2 Document review. The consultants would review City documents relevant to the updating of
the Development Code, including but not limited to the General Plan, applicable specific plans,
the current Development Code, environmental guidelines, business license regulations and any
Page 3
2006-99
Proposal for the City of San Bernardino Development Code Update
development requirements routinely imposed by the Public Works, Fire, or other City
Departments. The consultants would also identify and examine provisions of other ordinances
(e.g., municipal code) in order to avoid conflicts with the Development Code, and to determine
whether or not these provisions need to be referenced within the updated Development Code.
The consultants understand the City's desire to review existing regulations in order to update
appropriate procedures, regulations, standards, and related provisions. Presumably this would
involve the staff "marking-up" a copy of the existing Development Code, including notes on
staff objectives for substantive changes to existing provisions, and need for new provisions,
where necessary.
1.3 Staff workshop. The consultants would conduct a workshop with appropriate City staff to
review and comment on alternative approaches to the new or revised regulations, where
necessary. The objective of the workshop would be to identify the appropriate form and content
of the updated Development Code.
1.4 Draft work program, phasing, and table of contents/outline.
The consultants would:
I. Prepare a work program, including an agreed upon methodology for working with the City
staff to obtain feedback on questions, recommendations, and draft submittals;
2. Develop an agreed upon phasing program with the City staff;
3. Develop a detailed project schedule based on the agreed upon phasing with the City staff;
and
4. Based on the input received in the staff workshop (Subtask 1.3), above, prepare a draft
annotated table of contents/outline in order to illustrate the intended content and order of
the updated document.
After staff review, the consultants would discuss the desired changes to the items identified
above, and direction for the preparation of the first draft of all provisions of the Development
Code update (Subtask 2.1), below.
PRODUCTS: Work program;
Phasing program;
Detailed project schedule;
Draft annotated table of contents/outline;
Electronic transmittal; and
Meetings: One startup meeting (Subtask 1.1) and one workshop (Subtask 1.3)
Page 4
2006-99
Proposal for the City of San Bernardino Development Code Update
Task 2 - Administrative Draft Development Code
The administrative draft provisions would be prepared by the consultants and submitted for review by
the City's staff. Following review of all administrative draft provisions, the consultants would
consolidate comments and again meet with staff to agree on needed revisions before proceeding to the
public review draft stage.
For the purposes of this work program, it is suggested that the Development Code update be prepared
by dividing the work into the following subtasks. In addition to the items specifically described
below, the Development Code update would include all of the other points regarding: maintenance of
the user friendly format and text; continual efforts to ensure internal consistency; necessary revision
and clarification to ensure readability and ease of use; and internal cross referencing.
Subtasks:
2.1 First draft of all provisions. The consultants understand that corresponding changes to the
Development Code are required to implement the new General Plan policies. At a minimum, the
following subject areas will need to be addressed:
I. Consolidation of the existing land use/zoning districts as determined to be needed. (Note:
The existing land use tables appear to be somewhat dated and could possibly be updated
during this process.) (The following is a sample of an updated table format.)
Key to Table
P Permitted Use
C Conditional use - Conditional Use Permit required (See Subsection 19.xx.xx)
" - " Use not allowed
Land Use Permit Reouirement bv District
OP CN CG CH See Section
Communication, Transnortation and Utilitv Facilities
Alternative Fuels and Recharging C C C C
Facilities
Motor Vehicle Parking Lot/ Structure - - P P
Facilities
Motor Vehicle Stora.e Facilities - - P P
Public Utility Service Offices P P P P
Public Works Maintenance Facilities P P P P
and Stora.e Yards
Satellite Dishes/ Antenna (less than 3 P P P P
feet/2meters in diameter)
Wireless Communications Facilities C C C C 19.xx.xxx
TABLE 2-5
ALLOW ABLE USES AND PERMIT REQUIREMENTS
FOR COMMERCIAL WNING DISTRICTS
2. Definitions -- Additions to/revisions as determined to be needed.
Page 5
2006-99
Proposal for the City of San Bernardino Development Code Update
3. Incorporation of additional design guidelines and development standards as determined to
be needed.
4. Incorporation of "flexibility" into the development standards and development incentives
(e.g., off-street parking requirements) in order to implement revitalization strategies,
especially for the commercial corridors. (Note: The existing standards tables appear to be
somewhat dated and could possibly be updated during this process.) (The following is a
sample of an updated table format.)
TABLE 2-6
COMMERCIAL ZONING DISTRICTS DEVELOPMENT STANDARDS
Development Zoning Districts
Standards OP CG
CN CH
Minimum Parcel Size 10,000 square feet
Minimum Parcel Width 100 feet I 60 feet 50 feet
Minimum Parcel Depth 100 feet
Setbacks Reauired
Front Average of
20 feet 10 feet 10 feet abutting
parcels
Side
Interior (each) 5 feet 10 feet I o feet o feet
Street 10 feet
Abutting 20 feet
residential zone
Rear 5 feet 10 feet
Maximum Parcel 60% 35% No Maximum (1)
Coverage by Structures
Maximum Structure 35 feet 50 feet I No Maximum
Height
Minimum Width of Area
Required for Driveways 20 feet
and other Street Access
Fences/Walls/Hedges See Subsection 19.xx.xxx (Fences, Walls, and Hedges)
Motor V chicle Parking See Chapter 19.xx (Off-Street Parking and Loading) and Subsection
19.xx.xxx
Satellite Antennae See Chapter 19.xx (Wireless Communications)
Signs See Chapter 19.xx (Signs)
5. Incorporation of "flexibility" into the standards for single-family infill development,
especially related to lot depth, lot width, and density.
6. Incorporation of incentives for development of owner occupied dwellings.
7. Provision of mixed-use (e.g., live/work) development standards.
Additionally, the consultants understand that the City wishes to review other aspects of the
Development Code to ensure consistency with State law, internal consistency, and to improve
the overall development review process. At a minimum, the following subject areas will need to
be addressed:
Page 6
2006-99
Proposal for the City of San Bernardino Development Code Update
1. Additional findings are required to support discretionary project approval.
2. Group home development standards.
3. Hillside Management Overlay District provisions.
4. Noise ordinance provisions (e.g., General Plan Policy Numbers 14.3.3 and 14.3.4).
5. Parking requirements in the commercial and industrial land use districts.
6. Parkland dedication requirements.
7. Review of permitted, development permitted, and conditionally permitted uses for changes
to streamline and simplify the discretionary review process while still maintaining the
desired level of project review.
8. Second unit development standards need to be updated for consistency with changes in
State law.
9. Setback requirements in the commercial and industrial land use districts.
10. Single-family residential development standards, including the following:
a. Accessory structures
b. Fences and walls
c. Lot coverage
d. Setbacks
11. Subdivision requirements need to be updated for consistency with changes in State law.
12. Trail development standards/guidelines.
It is very clearly understood by our firm that while the City has identified this program as a
comprehensive update to the 1991 Development Code, a major overhaul to the current Code is
not desired nor is being proposed. Our firm further understands that the format, layout, and
overall organization of the current Development Code works well for the City and that a good
number of architects, contractors, developers, and engineers are familiar with the layout of the
Development Code and would not want to experience any unnecessary format-related changes.
We want to assure the City that we have undertaken this type of assignment in the past, with
extremely successful conclusions. We know what you want and have the experience and ability
to accomplish your vision for this project.
This group of provisions and related matrices would be transmitted to staff for review, after
which the consultants and staff would meet to discuss desired changes and direction for
preparing the revised draft materials discussed under Subtask 2.2.
Page 7
2006-99
Proposal for the City of San Bernardino Development Code Update
PRODUCTS: First draft of all provisions;
Draft matrix of revised zoning districts, allowable uses, and required permits;
Draft matrix of revised zoning district development standards;
Electronic transmittal; and
Meetings: One meeting
While the "wish list" or "fit-it list" identified above is recognizably extensive, experience with
similar types of update projects indicates that during the update process the City staff and the
consultants should anticipate that other regulations and provisions will likely be identified for
minor or major "fixes" and still others will likely be identified as needed additions. (Please see
item number 2. [Additional Items in Need of Update] located in Section D. [Optional Services],
below, for a discussion regarding fees for additional work efforts.)
While this subtask is proposed to include all of the update provisions in one Subtask, the
consultants are clearly aware that the City's RFP specifies that the update shall be completed in
pre-approved phases, the consultants are more than willing and able to comply with this
direction if that is the final choice of the City. We would simply break up Subtask 2.1 (and the
relevant portions of Subtasks 2.2 and those following) into manageable, yet smaller, Subtasks in
order to accommodate the City's desire to handle the "wish list" or "fit-it list" identified above in
smaller segments for City staff review and comment, as well as for the public review and
adoption phases. Experience, however, indicates that the only apparent down side to this
approach could possibly be to spread the completion of the project over a longer period of time.
The consultants want to make it very clear that we are capable and willing to meet the City's
desired approach, whichever approach is selected.
2.2 Revised draft of all provisions. The consultants would make all of the revisions identified by
City staff following completion of Subtask 2.1, above.
This revised group of draft provisions would be transmitted to staff for review. The consultants
would then meet with the staff to review the work, discuss desired changes, and discuss direction
for the preparation of the complete administrative draft in codified form discussed under Subtask
2.3.
PRODUCTS: Revised draft of all provisions;
Revised draft matrix of zoning districts, allowable uses, and required permits;
Revised draft matrix of zoning district development standards;
Electronic transmittal; and
Meetings: One meeting
2.3 Complete administrative draft in codified (e.g., screencheck) form. This task would include
assembly of the revised materials directed by staff. Additionally, the consultants would
complete the entire administrative draft in codified (e.g., screencheck) form. This version could
take the form of a legislative document with all deleted text stricken and all new text underlined,
if desired by City staff. Another option could be to have the entire administrative draft finished
in a clean form, without stricken and underlined text. The later option would obviously result in
a document that is easier to read than would the legislative option. Existing illustrations would
Page 8
2006-99
Proposal for the City of San Bernardino Development Code Update
be reviewed, and revised and supplemented as necessary, to ensure that they assist users in
visualizing the applicability of the development standards and definitions.
PRODUCTS: Complete administrative draft in codified form; and
Electronic transmittal.
Task 3 -Public Review Draft and Final Development Code
The public review draft Development Code update would incorporate all changes directed by staff
during their review of the complete administrative draft in codified form, and would be further revised
through its review by the Planning Commission and Mayor and Common Council. The final
Development Code document would be produced after adoption by the Mayor and Common Council.
Subtasks:
3.1 Public review draft. The public review draft Development Code would incorporate all changes
to the administrative draft in codified form directed by staff, as well as incorporate all
illustrations.
PRODUCTS: Public Review Draft Development Code; and
Electronic transmittal.
3.2 Planning Commission and Mayor and Common Council public workshop and hearing
revisions. It is anticipated that the consultant would facilitate six jointly held public workshops
and hearings before the Planning Commission and the Mayor and Common Council. An
addendum containing the Commission's recommended changes would be prepared by the
consultant for use by the Mayor and Common Council.
PRODUCTS: Addendum containing Planning Commission's recommendations; and
Electronic transmittal.
3.3 Final Development Code. After Mayor and Common Council action to adopt the updated
Development Code, the consultants would prepare the final documents that incorporate all
changes adopted by the Mayor and Common Council.
PRODUCTS: One original reproducible copy of the updated Final Development Code; and
One original CD of the final text formatted in MS Word.
Task 4 - Meetings and Hearings
Although listed here as the final task of the work program, the following hearings, meetings,
workshops would be spread over the entire course of the Development Code update project. The
proposed consultant's fee for this project anticipates that one consultant would generally attend all
meetings; however, some meetings may require attendance by both of the consultants.
Subtasks:
Page 9
2006-99
Proposal for the City of Sail Bernardillo Developmellt Code Update
4.1 Staff meetings. The consultants would meet with the City's project manager, and other key staff
(e.g., Enforcement Officer, City Attorney, etc.), throughout the project to identify issues, discuss
options and define direction for specific tasks, and review and discuss work products. Based on
the proposed process for completing the Development Code update, the consultants anticipate
meeting with staff on five occasions during the course of the project. The consultants would be
available to attend additional meetings on a flat fee basis identified on page 12.
These meetings would include, but not be limited to:
. Discuss objectives. Initial discussions to review the objectives of the project and the
specific changes needed to the current standards and procedures; and
. Discuss changes. Meetings to discuss changes to the deliverable work products desired by
staff after completion of their review of the submittals and to discuss direction for future
work products.
PRODUCTS: Meetings: Five staff meetings.
4.2 Planuing Commission and Mayor and Common Council public workshops and hearings.
. The consultants would attend and facilitate six public workshops and hearings before the
Planning Commission and the Mayor and Common Council.
. At each meeting the consultants would explain draft Development Code provisions, answer
questions, and suggest changes based on Planning Commission and Mayor and Common
Council direction.
As stated above, the consultants are proposing to attend and facilitate a total of six meetings
(e.g., workshops and hearings). However, the actual number and type of meeting (workshops or
hearings) is at the discretion of the City. Also at the City's discretion, is the scheduling of the
meetings. They may be retained at the end or disbursed throughout the proposed schedule (e.g.,
conduct one of the meetings during the project start up phase and maybe one during the middle
of the scope of work to identify and receive direction on specific policy issues.) The consultants
would be available to attend additional public workshops and hearings on a flat fee basis
identified on page 12.
PRODUCTS: Mayor and Common Council adopted Development Code; and
Meetings: Six workshopslhearings with the Planning Commission and Mayor
and Common Council.
Page 10
2006'+99
Proposal for the City of San Bernardino Development Code Update
B. Proposed Project Schedule
Our proposed time schedule for the San Bernardino Development Code update anticipates completion
of the administrative draft Development Code within approximately 6 to 7 months from the notice to
proceed from the City. Our experience with other similar projects suggests that the critical path in
meeting this schedule is the time required by City staff to review the individual submittals of the draft
in order to provide direction to the consultants for any desired refinements. Adoption of the updated
Development Code and the preparation of final documents is dependent upon the scheduling of the
Planning Commission and Mayor and Common Council workshops/hearings, but could be completed
within a total of 8 to 9 months as shown on the following detailed project schedule.
PROJECT SCHEDULE BY TASK
TASKS To BE SUBMITTED/CONDUCTED
1.1 Startup Meeting Within 14 days of City's written "Notice to Proceed"
1.2 Document Review During the next four weeks
1.3 Staff Workshop Within 30 days of City's written "Notice to Proceed"
1.4 Draft Format and Outline Within 14 days following conclusion of Task No. 1.3
2.1 First Draft of Provisions Within 90 days following submittal of Task No. 1.4
2.2 Revised Draft of Provisions Within 45 days following submittal of Task No. 2.1
2.3 Complete Administrative Draft Within 30 days following submittal of Task No. 2.2
3.1 Public Review Draft Within 30 days following submittal of Task No. 2.3
3.2 Planning CommissionfMayor and To be determined at a later date
Common Council Revisions
3.3 Final Development Code To be determined at a later date
4.2 Planning Commission/Mayor and To be determined at a later date
Common Council WorkshopsfHearings
Page 11
2006-99
Proposal for the City of San Bernardino Development Code Update
c. Proposed Project Budget
Our proposed project fee includes all of the services and products described in Part A. 2., (Work
Program), above. The total cost for completing the proposed work program is $77,000.00. The
proposed fees are based on the following billing rates, which would be used for any additional work
performed on a flat rate basis:
Participant Hourly Rate
Principals $125.00
Software Engineer $75.00
Graphic Designer $65.00
Word Processing $45.00
Meetings
Public hearings/meetings $1,000.00 per principal, per day
Staff meetings $850.00 per principal, per day
(Note: No additional charge for additional meetings
when conducted on the same day.)
A breakdown of the proposed fee by work task is provided on the following page. The proposed fee
includes all consultant overhead costs and direct costs (e.g., travel, phone, postage, etc.).
Page 12
2006-99
Proposal for the City of San Bernardino Development Code Update
PROPOSED PROJECT BUDGET
1
Tasks
Needs Identification and Document Review
1.1 Startup Meeting
1.2 Document Review
1.3 Staff Workshop
1.4 Draft Table of Contents/Outline Description
Administrative Draft Development Code
2.1 First Draft of all Provisions
2.2 Revised Draft of all Provisions
2.3 Complete Administrative Draft in Codified Form
Public Review Draft and Final Development Code
3.1 Public Review Draft
3.2 Planning Commission and Mayor and Common Council Revisions
3.3 Final Development Code
2
3
4
Meetings, Hearings, and Workshops
4.1 Staff Meetings (5)
4.2 Planning Commission/Mayor and Common Council Hearings (6)
Total Fee
Task Fee
$2,000
5,000
2,000
1,000
22,500
12,500
8,500
5,000
3,750
3,750
5,000
6,000
$77,000.00
Page 13
2006-99
Proposal for the City of San Bernardino Development Code Update
D. Optional Services
The following optional services are proposed by the consultants, based on our experience with
endeavors similar to this Development Code update program (e.g., Clovis, Hollister, Lodi, Murrieta,
Rancho Mirage, Simi Valley, Stockton, etc.). Consequently, we are offering the following optional
tasks for your consideration and evaluation, as to need and related costs.
The cost for each of the tasks, which is beyond the project bndget outlined on the previous page,
represents a proposed fee which is open to further refinement based on City staff s input and the
consultant's understanding of the expected level of effort required to successfully accomplish the
task(s).
1. Community Outreach Program
We believe that the City's available budget may not provide for an adequate amount of public
outreach Part A. 2. (Work Program), above that would normally be incorporated into a
Development Code update similar to San Bernardino's. The consultants would facilitate a
community outreach program intended to solicit public participation and input for preparation of
the Development Code update. The outreach program may include the following subtasks, at the
discretion of the City's project manager:
Field Trip. One or more field trips with invited guests as determined to be appropriate by the
City's project manager (e.g., Mayor and Common Council, Commission, stakeholders, City staff,
etc.). The field trip would be to assist the City representatives and guests in personally viewing
the predominant types of development occurring in the community, and how implementation of
the Development Code update could help the City achieve its goals for both quality development
and a streamlined application processing system.
Planning Commission and Mayor and Common Council Workshop. An early scheduled
workshop (between Subtasks 1.3 and 1.4) could be held as a joint meeting of the Planning
Commission and Mayor and Common Council. At the public workshop, the consultants would
explain the work program, schedule, and anticipated products associated with the Development
Code update. Previously identified (and staff approved) issues would be presented to the
participants, and following discussion, direction would be given in the form of "straw votes" or
consensus of opinions.
The field trip and workshop could be conducted on a Saturday in order to provide a less hectic
and more informal environment for the attendees, which normally results in a more productive
meeting. (Note: Our experience indicates that a Saturday morning, from 9:00 a.m. to 1:00 or
2:00 p.m. would be the most desirable.)
StakeholderslInvited Citizens Workshops/Meetings. These one-hour-plus scheduled sessions
would begin with an explanation of the work program, schedule, and anticipated products
associated with the Development Code update. After each presentation, the consultants and City
staff would be available to discuss the specific concerns that the participants may identify.
Page 14
2006-99
Proposal for the City of Sail Bemardillo Developmellt Code Update
Proposed Budget Rauge: $4,500.00 to 7,500.00 (depeuding on selected choices)
2. Additional Items in Need of Update
While the "wish list" or "fit-it list" identified in Subtask 2.1 (First draft of all provisions), above
is recognizably extensive, experience with similar types of update projects indicates that during
the update process other regulations and provisions will likely be identified for minor or major
"fixes" and still others will likely be identified as needed additions.
Proposed Budget: The charge for completion of the additional items in need of update can
either be charged on a flat fee basis as identified on page 12 or a renegotiated fixed fee basis, at
the discretion of the City.
3. Electronic On-Line Development Code
We propose to produce a hypertext-based, complete verSIOn of the Development Code
containing all text and illustrations as an optional service. Although the functional details of the
electronic Development Code and the appearance of its user interface would be worked out
through discussions with staff during the initial project meetings, the following describes our
suggested approach at this point.
A user of the electronic Development Code would find its initial computer screen to be a
scrollable hypertext table of contents showing titles of all chapters. Any selection would jump to
the applicable page. Each page is scrollable (pages larger than the computer screen frame can be
shifted up or down to allow viewing all parts of the page). "Forward" and "Back" buttons on the
toolbar at the top of the screen would allow moving from page to page.
Additional toolbar buttons include: "Print," "Save," "Bookmark," "Annotate," and "Search."
These buttons allow: printing of individual or groups of pages; saving one or more pages to a
text file; marking a page or section for future reference; or creating personal notes including
user-definable information to be remembered relative to a particular section (which is stored in a
separate file, but linked to the document file); and searching the complete Development Code
using keywords, which produces a temporary (but printable hypertext list of sections containing
the keyword (e.g., all sections with regulations involving "fences").
We would also discuss with staff the issues involving the specific software selected to produce
the electronic Development Code. The electronic Code could look and operate identical to the
"help" screens provided by software applications written for Microsoft Windows, and could be
developed using the same software that produced the help facilities. However, more flexibility
and wider availability of the electronic version of the Code could be provided by preparing it in
one of the languages used to create "homepages" for the World Wide Web. As a "web"
application, the Code could be made available over both the City's internal computer network
and also externally, when linked to the City's homepage.
The electronic version of the Development Code would be produced in two tasks. A "proof of
concept" version, consisting of the user interface, search and other facilities with a
demonstration portion of the data, would be produced for staffreview. A final, complete version
Page 15
2006-99
Proposal for the City of San Bernardino Development Code Update
of the electronic Code would be produced after Mayor and Common Council's adoption of the
final Development Code.
The consultants would install a test version of the software in the Department, and instruct staff
on its use. Based on staff feedback from use of the test version, the consultants would prepare
final versions of the software and conduct workshops for staff on the instalIation and use of the
system. The consultants would remain available to answer staff questions and correct any
problems with the software for a period of one year at no additional cost to the City.
Proposed Budget: $14,750.00
For an example of one of our recent on-line codes, please go to the following link to view the
City of Pasadena On-Line Zoning Code: http://www.ci.oasadena.ca.us/zoning/index.html
4. Development Code Maintenance
It is common for a City adopting a new or updated Development Code to find the need for
various "cleanup" amendments to the Code during the first year of its use. Later, other
amendments would be needed over the course of routine Development Code administration
because of new State mandates or case law, changing community needs and attitudes, and/or
unexpected land use or development issues. We offer the City the following options.
Option 1
First year Development Code amendment support. The consultants would provide "product
support" during the first year after adoption of the Development Code update:
A. Availability for assistance and de-bugging. Being available by telephone to assist staff
with the interpretation of Code provisions and the "de-bugging" of the Code during the
first year of its use, maintaining a record of provisions that are determined to be
problematic to administer;
B. Development Code text amendments. Meeting with staff to review needed changes, and
drafting and packaging the Development Code text amendments necessary to refine
difficult provisions and improve the effectiveness and efficiency of Code administration.
The amendments would be provided in standard City ordinance amendment format for
Planning Commission/Mayor and Common Council review and adoption; and
C. Updating electronic version. Updating the electronic version of the Development Code
concurrently with the adoption of any amendments to the official Code.
The proposed fee for the "first year" work is intended to be comprehensive, and cover all
necessary "clean-up" amendments.
Proposed Budget: $7,500.00
Option 2
Page 16
2006-99
Proposal for the City of San Bernardino Development Code Update
Annual amendment package. Because of the uncertainty of the scope and extent of the
Development Code amendments that would be needed by the City after the first year, we suggest
meeting with staff on an annual basis thereafter, to review City needs for ongoing Development
Code amendments, and draft an annual amendment package. The proposed fee for this service
anticipates the consultants providing the equivalent of up to 10 full pages of new Development
Code text, on topics to be determined through meetings with staff. Additional amendments
would be discussed and charged separately.
The amendment package would be provided in standard City ordinance amendment format for
Planning CommissionlMayor and Common Council review and adoption, and would be
incorporated into the electronic Code as of the effective date of any amendments. The
consultants would be available to attend Planning Commission and Mayor and Common Council
meetings on a flat rate basis.
Proposed Budget: $5,000.00
Page 17
2006-99
Proposal for the City of San Bernardino Development Code Update
E. Utilization of Graphics
Our firm prides itself in its ability to prepare user friendly zoning documents. One of the elements
contributing to the "easy to use" nature of the documents we prepare is the extensive use of graphic
illustrations.
The San Bernardino Development Code update would be highly illustrated to ensure its ease of use.
We have not placed a limit on the number of graphic illustrations that can be used in the Code. We
would work with staff to determine which development standards and definitions could benefit from
the use of an illustration to make its meaning more clear.
F. City Staff Commitments
City staff will playa critical role on the overall Development Code update project team, by providing
the primary guidance for, and feedback to the consultant team in the drafting of the updated
Development Code. Specific needs for staff involvement will include:
1. Assisting the consultants in Task 1.3 by setting up all necessary meetings in the City with staff,
stakeholders, Planning Commission, and Mayor and Common Council;
2. Reviewing and commenting on each of the administrative draft Development Code submittals in
Task 2 as to their acceptability and appropriateness, in terms of content, language, and
presentation;
3. Reviewing and commenting on the complete administrative draft Development Code in codified
(e.g., screencheck) form as to accuracy in incorporating changes directed by City staff, the
Planning Commission, and the Mayor and Common Council;
4. Being available to respond to questions and needs for additional information throughout the
Development Code updating process;
5. Preparing, posting, advertising, and/or mailing all legal notices for CEQA compliance and public
hearings before the Planning Commission and Mayor and Common Council;
6. Providing all copying services, except as clearly identified under deliverables;
7. Preparing all staff reports and adopting ordinances, including preparing all required
environmental documentation III compliance with CEQA and the City implementation
procedures; and
8. Distributing the public hearing drafts to all applicable parties.
Page 18
2006-99
Proposal for the City of San Bernardino Development Code Update
The actual staff time commitments necessary for each of the above tasks wi\l vary according to their
particular roles in the administration of the new Development Code. The consultants wi\l work with
staff during Task I to assist in defining internal protocols and individual roles for staff participation in
the Development Code update drafting and review process so that their time can be used most
efficiently and with a minimum of disruption to their daily workloads unrelated to the Development
Code update process.
City Staff resources required for this project would include the following:
o Copies of the current Development Code (both in hard copy and in an electronic format);
o Copies of any existing design guidelines;
o Staff's comments regarding specific problem areas or specific areas not to change. A Staff
marked-up copy of the current Development Code would be truly beneficial to the consultant
team;
o Copies of all recent (and on-going) ordinance amendments;
o Copies of the City's newly adopted General Plan update (and the implementation program in an
electronic format), if available;
o Copies of the General Plan Program Environmental Impact Report;
o Copies of any adopted specific plans;
o Copies of all Department handouts, fee schedule, and other development-related City
documents; and
o Copies of all pertinent City policies (formal and informal) both in hard copy and in an electronic
format.
Page 19
2006-99
Proposal for the City of San Bernardino Development Code Update
G. The Firm
The following is a brief description of the firm that will prepare the City of San Bernardino update.
1. Identification of Firm
JACOBSON & WACK
Land Use Planning Consnltants
9530 Hageman Road, Suite B-205
Bakersfield, CA 93312
(661) 213-4100 (Phone)
(661) 213-4111 (FAX)
The partnership of Jacobson & Wack is a specialized firm providing planning consulting services
exclusively to California cities and counties since 1980. Mr. Jacobson and Mr. Wack represent
approximately 70 years of collective local planning experience in the public sector and in private
consulting practice.
The firm specializes in the following areas:
.
.
Development Codes/Zoning Ordinances
Subdivision Ordinances
.
.
Local Coastal Programs
Rezoning StudieslPrograms
2. Firm Member Profiles
Bruce Jacobson, Principal of Jacobson & Wack is a land use planner and administrator with over 35
years of planning experience. With Jacobson & Wack he has prepared numerous development codes,
zoning ordinances, and subdivision ordinances.
Earlier planning positions include Deputy Planning Director for San Luis Obispo County, Principal
Planner for Ventura County, and Interim Planning Director for the City of Santa Paula.
His work on the City of San Bernardino Development Code was recognized with a national award
for ontstanding planning from the American Planning Association in 1992. The APA award
selection jury cited the Code's easy to use format, graphics, and straightforward (non-legalese)
language as major attributes contributing to the "user friendly" nature of the Code. The San
Bernardino Development Code combined zoning, subdivision, design guidelines, and hillside
preservation standards into one comprehensive document.
Mr. Jacobson regularly shares his experiences with, and perspectives on zoning and subdivision
ordinance preparation and administration through two professional development courses: Redesigning
the Zoning Ordinance, at UC Davis Extension, and Designing and Implementing Effective Zoning
Ordinances, at UCLA Extension.
Mr. Jacobson graduated from the California State Polytechnic University in San Luis Obispo,
California in 1971 with a degree of Bachelor of Science with a major in City and Regional Planning.
Page 20
2006-99
Proposal for the City of San Bernardino Development Code Update
Paul Wack, AICP, Principal of Jacobson & Wack has over 35 years experience as a land use planner,
administrator, educator, and consultant to the public sector. His municipal planoing career began as an
Assistant Planner with Ventura County, where he was responsible for the full range of plan
implementation activities.
As a Principal Planner with the County, he was responsible for all land development applications,
zoning/subdivision ordinance revisions, environmental review, zoning enforcement, public
information, etc. In addition, Mr. Wack served as the Administrator of the County's Land
Conservation Act Program and Project Manager of the County's Coastal Study.
During his tenure as Assistant Planning Director of Santa Barbara County, Mr. Wack served as the
Director of the County Comprehensive Plan, Manager of the County Local Coastal Program, Chair of
the County Liquefied Natural Gas (LNG) Siting Task Force, and Manager of the 150,000 acre
Lompoc Valley Rezone Study. Mr. Wack also served on the Santa Barbara County Planning
Commission for four years.
As principal with Jacobson & Wack, Mr. Wack specializes in the preparation of planoing
implementation documents, including development codes, zoning ordinances, subdivision ordinances,
local coastal programs, rezoning studies, etc.
Mr. Wack is on the faculty of both Cal Poly, San Luis Obispo and the University of Cali fomi a, Santa
Barbara where he teaches plan implementation courses and community planning labs. Mr. Wack's
zoning related publications include "The Purpose of Purpose Statements in Zoning Ordinances"
(Zoning News, March 2000) and is-a co-author of "Zoning and subdivision regulations (Chapter 14)",
in The Practice of Local Government Planning. Third Edition. 2000. Washington, DC. International
City/County Management Association. Mr. Wack periodically teaches Redesigning the Zoning
Ordinance, at UC Davis Extension, which focuses on the preparation of development codes and
zoning ordinances.
Page 11
2006-99
Proposal for the City of San Bernardino Development Code Update
H. Responsibilities and Experience
1. Responsibilities
Mr. Jacobson will serve as project manager for the City of San Bernardino Project. He will work with
Paul Wack in the completion of each of the tasks identified in Part A. 2. (Work Program), above. Our
long-term working relationship will ensure that the final document is internally consistent while
maintaining the high degree of "user friendliness" desired by the City.
2. Relevant Zoning Ordinance/Development Code Experience
The consulting firm of Jacobson & Wack (J&W), both individually, and as a team with Crawford
Multari & Clark Associates (CMCA), and RBF Consulting - Urban Design Studio (RBFfUDS) have
prepared more than 60 zoning and development codes, subdivision ordinances, and design guidelines
documents. This extensive body of work includes the following projects, some of which are works in
progress.
Coastal Zoning Ordinance, City of Malibu
Coastal Zoning Ordinance, City of Oxnard
Coastal Zoning Ordinance, City ofPismo Beach
Design Guidelines as part of the following Development Codes, where noted
Development Code (zoning/subdivision/design), City of Alameda
Development Code (zoning/subdivision/coastal), City of Arcata
Development Code (zoning/subdivision/design) City of Brea
Development Code (zoning/subdivision/design) City of Brentwood
Development Code (zoning/subdivision/design) City of Chico
Development Code (zoning/subdivision/design) City of Diamond Bar
Development Code (zoning/subdivision/coastal), City of Fort Bragg
Development Code (zoning/subdivision/design) City of Fresno
Development Code (zoning/subdivision) City of Hollister
Development Code (zoning/subdivision/design) City of Lodi
Development Code (zoning/subdivision/design) City of Mission Viejo
Development Code (zoning/subdivision/design) City of Murrieta
Development Code (zoning/subdivision) City of Norwalk
Development Code (zoning/subdivision/design) City of Pomona
Development Code (zoning/subdivision/design) City of San Bernardino
Development Code (zoning/subdivision) County of San Bernardino
Development Code (zoning/subdivision/design) City ofSimi Valley
Development Code (zoning/subdivision/design) City of Sonoma
Development Code (zoning/subdivision) City of Stockton
Development Code (zoning/subdivision/coastal), Marin County
Development Code (zoning/subdivision/design) Town of Truckee
Sign ordinances with all the above development codes, and the zoning ordinances below
Subdivision Ordinance, City of South Pasadena
Subdivision ordinances as part of all of the above development codes
Page 22
2006-99
Proposal for the City of San Bernardino Zoning Ordinance Update
Zoning Ordinance, City of Burbank
Zoning Ordinance, Calaveras County
Zoning Ordinance, City of Campbell
Zoning Ordinance, City of Cotati
Zoning Ordinance, City of Culver City
Zoning Ordinance, City of Cypress
Zoning Ordinance, City of Desert Hot Springs
Zoning Ordinance, City of Gustine
Zoning Ordinance, City of Huntington Park
Zoning Ordinance, City of Lompoc
Zoning Ordinance, City of Malibu
Zoning Ordinance, City of Mountain View
Zoning Ordinance, City of Novato
Zoning Ordinance, City of Newport Beach
Zoning Ordinance, City of Ojai
Zoning Ordinance, City of Oxnard
Zoning Ordinance, City of Pasadena
Zoning Ordinance, City ofPismo Beach
Zoning Ordinance, City of Rancho Mirage (1987 and 2000)
Zoning Ordinance, City of San Ramon
Zoning Ordinance, City of Santa Monica
Zoning Ordinance, City of Santa Rosa
Zoning Ordinance, City of South Pasadena
Zoning Ordinance, City of Tustin
Zoning Ordinance, City of West Hollywood
Zoning Ordinance, Lake Havasu City, Arizona
Zoning Ordinance, Solano County
Zoning Ordinance, Town of Loomis
Zoning Ordinance, Town of Windsor
3. Advantages of Firm
We believe that our firm offers the City of San Bernardino an ideal combination of background and
expertise for preparing all components ofthe Development Code update program. Our knowledge and
experience will ensure that all documents produced will not only be of high technical quality, but are
also designed to be "user-friendly", clear, understandable, and practical. We have a very strong
reputation for producing timely, high-quality work. We believe that our firm offers the following
advantages:
. Significant experience with the drafting and adoption of integrated zoning ordinances/
development codes and other types of development regulations and associated public
participation efforts. The City of San Bernardino Development Code, completed by Jacobson &
Wack and RBF/UDS, received a national award from the American Planning Association. This
demonstrates our ability to create solutions to zoning and planning problems that are both
innovative and practical.
Page 23
2006-99
Proposal for the City of San Bernardino Zoning Ordinance Update
. Extensive "hands on" experience with all levels of zoning and subdivision ordinance
administration, ranging from answering zoning inquiries at the "front counter," to the processing
of land use permit applications and preparation of staff reports, to division and department
management. We have personally drafted zoning, subdivision, grading, and building ordinances
and then been responsible for the administration and enforcement of those regulations. We
understand the wide array of day-to-day issues staff must address in ordinance administration,
and the needs of the public for timely, accurate responses to their questions.
. Acknowledged experience with successful public participation and outreach programs, including
public workshops, publicity, and notice materials of all types.
. We regularly share our experiences with, and perspectives on zoning and subdivision ordinance
preparation and administration through two professional development courses: Redesigning the
Zoning Ordinance, at UC Davis Extension, and Designing and Implementing Effective Zoning
Ordinances, at UCLA Extension.
. Our established, effective working relationship, developed from numerous previous projects,
enable us to provide efficient and cost-effective services.
. Our emphasis on project principals actually drafting the entire Development Code text, ensuring
that the products reflect the most extensive experience and informed analysis.
Page 24
2006-99
Proposal for the City of San Bernardino Zoning Ordinance Update
I. References
The following are selected and relevant examples of the projects prepared by Jacobson & Wack
(1& W), as well as with the assistance of Crawford Multari & Clark Associates (CMCA) and/or RBF
Consulting - Urban Design Studio (RBF/UDS).
City of Chico Development Code (J&W, CMCA, and UDS). Prepared comprehensive
revisions to the City's Zoning and Subdivision Ordinances following the adoption of a new
General Plan, and the integration into the Development Code of new community design
guidelines. Besides implementing new General Plan policies involving compact urban form and
other community design issues, the update emphasizes logical organization and ease of use, as
well as streamlining the development review process.
Contact: Pam Figge, Senior Planner
City of Chico
916-895-4851
City of Clovis Development Code (J&W). Preparing a comprehensive Development Code,
incorporating zoning, subdivision, and City-wide design guidelines into an integrated document.
Contact: Orlando Ramirez, Associate Planner
City of Clovis
559-324-2345
City of Cypress Zoning Ordinance (J&W and UDS). Prepared the City's first new
comprehensive Zoning Ordinance after incorporation.
Contact: Ted Commerdinger, Senior Planner
City of Cypress
949-470-3000
City of Fillmore Zoning Ordinance (J&W and UDS). Completed a new Zoning Ordinance
for a small, mature City devastated by the Northridge earthquake.
Contact: J. Anthony Perez, Associate Planner
City of Fillmore (now with Moule & Polyzoides Architects)
805-524-3701 (now at 626-844-2400)
City of Fountain Valley Development Code (J&W, CMCA, and UDS). Prepared a
comprehensively updated Development Code, incorporating zoning and subdivision provisions
for this built-out Orange County community.
Contact: Andrew Perea, Planning Director
City of Fountain Valley
714-593-4400
Page 25
2006-99
Proposal for the City of San Bernardino Zoning Ordinance Update
City of Mission Viejo Development Code (J&W and UDS). Prepared the City's first new
comprehensive Development Code after incorporation, including zoning, subdivision, and
Citywide design guidelines into an integrated document.
Contact: Charles Wilson, Director
City of Mission Viejo
949-470-3000
City of Murrieta Developmeut Code (J&W and DDS). Prepared a comprehensive
Development Code, incorporating zoning, subdivision, and design guidelines into an integrated
document.
Contact: Patti Nahill, Senior Planner
City of Murrieta (now with PGN Associates)
909-698-1040 (now at 909-677 -0405)
City of Ojai Zoning Ordinance (J&W and CMCA). Prepared a new Zoning Ordinance for a
small, mature City in Ventura County.
Contact: Bill Prince, Principal Planner
City ofOjai (now the Community Development Director, City of Brisbane)
805-564-5470 (now at 415-508-2120)
City of Pasadena Zoning Code (J&W and CMCA). Prepared a comprehensive update of the
Pasadena Zoning Code in concert with the preparation and adoption of the City's new General
Plan.
Contact: Denver Miller, Zoning Administrator
City of Pasadena
626-744-6733
City of Rancho Mirage Zoning Code (J&W). Prepared a comprehensive update of the City's
Zoning Code following a recent update to the General Plan.
Approximately twelve years later, Jacobson & Wack were asked to update the Zoning Code
once again following an update to the General Plan.
Contact: Carl Bishop, Senior Planner
City of Rancho Mirage
760-382-2266
City of San Bernardino Development Code (J&W and UDS). Prepared a comprehensive
Development Code, incorporating zoning, subdivision and City-wide design guidelines into an
integrated, easy-to-use document. Hillside development and ridge line protection were among
Page 26
2006-99
Proposal for the City of San Bernardino Zoning Ordinance Update
the many issues addressed. Recipient of National APA Ontstanding Planning Award for Plan
Implementation, 1992.
Following use of the new Development Code for an extended period of time, Jacobson &
Wack were asked to prepare several revisions to the Code in order to meet the changing needs
of the City.
Contact: Valerie Ross, Deputy Director/City Planner
City of San Bernardino
909-384-5057
County of San Bernardino Development Code (J&W, CMCA, and UDS). Preparing a
comprehensive Development Code, incorporating zoning and subdivision regulations into an
integrated, easy-to-use Development Code.
Contact: Jim Squire, Senior Planner
County of San Bernardino
(909) 387-4180
City of Simi Valley (J&W and CMCA). Prepared a comprehensive Development Code,
incorporating zoning and subdivision regulations and City-wide design guidelines into an
integrated document.
Contact: Christine Silver, Senior Planner
City of Simi Valley
805-583-6863
City of Sonoma Development Code (J&W, CMCA, and DDS). Prepared a new Development
Code following the adoption of the City of Sonoma's new General Plan. This unique Code
approaches zoning issues from the perspectives of the New Urbanism. The Code focuses on
preserving the character of existing historic neighborhoods in a community faced with
substantial growth pressures.
Contact: David Goodison, City Planner
City of Sonoma
707-938-9681
City of Stockton Development Code (J&W, CMCA, and DDS). Prepared a comprehensive
Development Code, incorporating zoning and subdivision regulations into an integrated
document.
Contact: Dianne Keil Smith, Senior Planner
City of Stockton (now transitioning into retirement)
209-937-8340
Town of Truckee Development Code (J&W, CMCA, and DDS). Prepared the Town's first
local zoning, subdivision regulations, and design guidelines after its incorporation as a city.
Page 27
2006-99
Proposal for tile City of San Bernardino Zoning Ordinance Update
Contact: Tony Lashbrook, Director
Town ofTruckee
916-582-7876
Page 28
2006-99
Proposal for the City of San Bernardino Zoning Ordinance Update
ApPENDIX A
Approach to Zoning Documents
Through our careers in administering, drafting, and teaching about development codes and zoning
ordinances, we have identified several important aspects to be considered in the process of preparing a
new code or ordinance, or updating an existing zoning document. Besides the fundamental goals of
effectively implementing the General Plan, satisfying State mandates and efficiently guiding day-to-
day development decisions, any new or updated code/ordinance should also focus on document
usability. It is important that zoning information be readily accessible and understandable to all users,
staff as well as the public. Among the format and content features that zoning documents should
include to enable ease of use by all parties are the following:
. Logical organization. The table of contents and the internal structure of chapters should be
organized to reflect the sequence in which ordinance users most commonly need to find specific
information. For example, the fact that many existing ordinances place their "Definitions" at the
beginning of the document would appear to suggest that users will routinely read the definitions
before any other portion of the ordinance, which in fact rarely occurs. While keeping the
definitions at the front of a zoning ordinance makes sense if maintaining the same format in all
segments of a municipal or county code is considered important, a primary question to ask in
deciding how to organize a zoning or subdivision ordinance is "Where will users most intuitively
expect to find specific information'?" People working with zoning documents tend to be most
interested in finding whether particular land uses are allowed in particular zones, what permits
are required, and then what regulations apply to the design and development of a use. The
ordinance should be organized to reflect these procedural sequences and the order in which
decisions about the applicability of provisions must be made.
. Clear language and readability. Zoning documents must be clearly written, avoiding
ambiguity, legal and planning jargon, and lengthy narrative, and use the simplest terms possible
to describe their requirements. Regulations should be consolidated into easy-to-understand
tables whenever possible, accompanied by graphics where the illustration of how a standard
applies to property can improve clarity and understanding. Overall, the format should employ
effective graphic design and page layout techniques to enhance readability.
. Informative chapter and section titles. A user should be able to readily determine the areas of
the ordinance that will affect their interests by reviewing the table of contents. Chapter and
section titles should be descriptive, as in "Standards for Specific Land Uses".
. Cross-references. While reviewing regulations on a particular topic, ordinance users must be
made aware of other related regulations that may affect their interests. A zoning document
should include cross-references to its other relevant provisions, as well as references to
potentially-applicable regulations (e.g., building, environmental, grading, subdivision, etc.) III
other municipal code documents, where appropriate.
. Extensive use of graphics. An ordinance should use graphics to assist in illustrating the
applicability and/or effect of regulations wherever illustration can improve understanding.
Page 29
2006-99
Proposal for the City of San Bernardino Zoning Ordinance Update
. Formal procedure for interpretations. The administration of zoning documents inevitably
involves the need for interpreting their provisions, where the applicability or effect of a
particular requirement may become uncertain because of a situation that was not anticipated
when the ordinance was drafted. These situations often include new land uses that did not exist
when the ordinance was prepared (e.g., video game arcades in the case of ordinances drafted in
the 1960s). A zoning document must clearly define the authority for interpretations, include a
formal procedure for all types, and provide a definitive means for incorporating them into the
ordinance through amendment, or otherwise ensuring that they will be effectively recorded for
future retrieval and use.
. Simplified permitting procedures. An ordinance should employ the least complicated
permitting procedures possible, consistent with State law requirements and the need to ensure
effective project review and proper implementation of the General Plan. Discretionary permits
may not be necessary if clear development or performance standards can effectively address all
community concerns about a particular land use through a ministerial permit process.
. Incorporation of a suitable level of flexibility. An ordinance should employ a suitable level of
flexibility in order to allow the department management an opportunity to adjust specified
development standards and/or other regulations when determined to be reasonable, necessary,
and appropriate in order to maintain the specified purpose, intent, and integrity of the codified
standards and/or regulations.
. Organization to accommodate changes. Ordinance chapters and sections should be organized
and numbered to accommodate amendments without the need for extensive renumbering of
existing sections. The initial drafting of the ordinance should anticipate the need for additional
regulatory topics in the future, and provide space in the numbering system for their later
inclusion. To accommodate future amendments, the ordinance should be prepared using
appropriate computer software with desktop publishing capability.
Page 30